Explaining Beyond a Reasonable Doubt to the Modern Juror

The purpose of this paper is to make the beyond a reasonable doubt standard in criminal trials more comprehensible for the modern juror while also increasing the modern juror’s motivation and ability to apply this standard consistent with trial proceedings. The major problems addressed include why the beyond a reasonable doubt standard is so difficult for modern jurors to understand in addition to why modern jurors lack both the motivation and ability to perform their integral function in criminal trials due to their enforced passive role. This paper traces the origins of the modern jury, delving into the centuries-long transition of the jury from an active to passive function, and the impacts historical change has had on the modern juror’s role in criminal trials. It also looks to define the beyond a reasonable doubt standard in terms of case law and pattern jury instructions and through contrast with its constituent lower civil standards of evidentiary certainty. The solution posed to remedy the aforementioned issues rests on a unique application of metaphor and imagery that can be implemented in lawyers’ rhetorical methods to instruct jurors on their paramount function in modern criminal suits.